I can't wrap my head around the design decision of the front facing camera impeding on the screen like that. It looks just awful and utterly destroys the phone for me.
When you consider how much bezel there is at the bottom of the screen to intrude into, they should have just done what Sharp did with their bezel-less phone and put the camera at the bottom. Seems like a missed opportunity.
That's a trade-off of having as much screen real-estate as possible and the desire to cram everything into one device.
No one else mentioned this, so it seems there will be people ok with it.
Unless someone invents a camera that can be invisibly be part of the LCD screen there's no way you won't ever see these compromises in other min screen bezel phones.
I don't see this as a deal breaker, but I understand some people are really annoyed by small details. For me the deal breaker is the price. I mean, regardless of the features the absolute price is too high.
The sealed battery, the missing MicroSD slot, and the lack of a headphone connector, it seems like some very fundamentally basic features were omitted. It's also disturbing that you can purchase $30 phone that's only 2.4mm thicker and get all those things for $669 USD less. Flagship phones like these are a really poor value proposition considering the rate at which they become obsolete, damaged, or lost and they're too large to easily carry.
You're not getting those specs in a $30 phone. I realize that many of the techies on here want things to never change. However, all those things that you are missing are due to form factor. So, while they may be practical in a device that is thicker and has larger bezels, they are not in this case. So, using bluetooth and the cloud. My current phone has the sealed battery and does not have microSD. To get it to slim & sexy you need to go to sealed battery. 128GB should be plenty for most usage. My permanent collection is not stored on my phone. Bluetooth audio is preferable on the go. I connect via Bluetooth to my Alpine when I'm in my car. I have a pair of headphones that also connect via Bluetooth. When I'm at home I don't need my phone for audio. Maybe if I was a teenager, but by the time you could afford quality audio you wouldn't be doing it with your phone anyways.
If you're happy with the SoC, storage, camera etc. in a 30$ phone go ahead and buy & use it. Most people currently using smartphones won't second that choice, though.
I have a Moto G4 Play. Not $30, but cheap enough, and I'm mostly happy with it.
The camera however is... Not good.
If that's what you want, go for it. It's not flashy, but it's solidly built, fast enough, and quite reliable. Just don't expect photos to come out looking like anything but cheap smartphone photos.
Yes, agreed you're landing in the domain of ultra-budget hardware at $30. My Alcatel Pixi Unite was $29 and it's camera most certainly takes photos that make its purchase price painfully obvious. I just can't see buying a high end handset like this when there's a whole range of more affordable options that fill the same purpose.
The problem is, a $30 Android phone does 80% of what a $700 Android phone does. That's the hard sell here. If it weren't for subsidies, the Galaxy S8 wouldn't sell nearly as well as it has, where as the iPhone would continue to sell well at retail prices because of the fanbase.
That isn't to say Samsung doesn't have a fanbase, but its smaller, and definately more of the subsidy/value crowd. The only decently priced iPhone ever released was obvious the SE, which was obviously free with contract being a $400 phone, but you'd be crazy not to buy a $400 phone outright and just save money on the service.
And that gets us back to budget Android devices. Being unsubsidized, not only are they cheap to own, but cheap to connect to a network, especially an MVNO like Ting.
One moderate drop and its done, I really do hate this trend towards fragile devices. It would be nice to have a high end phone that actually comes in a slightly thicker, more resilient package.
Complaints seem pretty archaic. Why do people continue wanting physical media when the infrastructure exists for cloud computing. We live in a world that is heading towards a completely un-tethered data structure. Keep permanent storage at home and offline.
I'm not a fan of the fragility in the current market but it is also subjective to how the phone lands as much as the materials. Thicker does not equate to strength and until micro-structures in things like Gorilla glass get perfected that is the price you pay to carry a flagship device.
Honestly I was thinking more of plastic, which tends to be frowned upon in high end devices. I get the complaint from a thermal point of view, but otherwise if i pay 700 for a device id expect it to not destroy itself from a moderate fall, which is less likely to happen with a slightly thicker glass, and slightly looser plastic case. But then I guess it loses its "premium feel", sigh i guess im just asking for a premium device that may not have the "premium feel", and they could use the extra space for a headphone jack and bigger battery, which would be way more beneficial honestly.
For me it's because mobile data is still really expensive. I can't get unlimited data where I live, and even if I could, it would be more per month than what I would pay for a 64GB SD card. I'd be fine using the cloud for everything, but not when I have to constantly worry how much it's going to cost me.
No audio jack and no microSD, this guy has never used Android. It's hard to start with a bigger disaster than that. It shows ignorance, lack of product design talent and no trace of decency.
Beyond that ,the excessive cutout and the chin just don't work together. By next yea,nobody will remember this device and they fully deserve that.
The excuse given for the large bottom bezel is that's where the display controller is. Why hasn't anyone installed the screen "upside down", with the controller at the top? That way, there's room for the front camera, sensors, and speakers at the top. There's nothing needed at the bottom but a microphone, headphone jack, and charging port, which can all go behind the screen and out the bottom.
Uh, you don't access the display controller with any part of your anatomy, it's not a user-facing part. It's what connects the display to the motherboard and controls what/how the display works.
He created an Android phone while still obsessed with the iPhone. Hence no SD card slot and headphone jack. Between this expensive ugly crap and the $70 iPhone 4, I'll take the latter.
"No audio jack and no microSD, this guy has never used Android. It's hard to start with a bigger disaster than that. It shows ignorance..."
Uh, you understand that Andy Rubin is the ceator/inventor of Android, right? He invented Android, then it was bought by Google, then he was the head of development of Android for Google for eight years until it became the global dominant phone OS. Oh yeah, and "Android" was Rubin's nickname, because he loved robots, when he was younger. So the Android operating system is in fact named after Rubin. So I suspect he has used Android, just a little.
Whatever you think of the phone design, saying that the person who made this phone does not understand Android is the only ignorance going on here.
No firm promise of timely Android updates for 3+ years = no buy.
And why the hell the non-replaceable battery again?
Somebody, please make an honest phone with US frequencies including Band 12 (and Qualcomm modem, I don't care if CPUs are Qualcomm or not). 0. Pure Android with immediate updates, including availability of betas, right after they are submitted to AOSP!!! 1. Fast CPU 2. Big, replaceable battery 3. No useless waste of battery for screen with too high resolution and power-hungry GPU to feed it, 1280x800 would do. 4. No bezels. 5. At least 1/2.3" rear sensor, OSPDAF, 4k, f/2 or faster. Sony's 23mpix would be good for digital zoom/cropping (if lens is fast and sharp in the middle), no 2nd camera needed. 6. Fast flash and DRAM. 7. IP68. 8. Honest price, if Qualcomm wants too much for S835, use Huawei or Samsung or whatever with at least a couple of fast cores. NO, 64GB of extra flash DOES NOT cost $100, look at SSDs, full 64GB SSD is $37 retail already, 128GB is $52 so it is $15 extra, retail.
MicroSD/2nd SIM slot would be good but not essential.
What flagship smartphone in the last several years has had a user replaceable battery? How can people still be complaining about this when it's been long gone for years now.
Anyway, your phone design suggestions would result in a phone that would be the size of a small tablet a weigh twice as much as most phones. If people want large screens (regardless of resolution) in a reasonable sized device, then something has to be scarificed.
People want all these things and don't understand that there are just basic design limitations and then complain when magic can't happen.
Also, your phone wouln't be any cheaper. The markup on flagship Android phones is only about 10% (30% on the iPhone). This phone is priced right in line with other flagship phones.
No one is going to sell you a device at no profit.
And if you really don't care about the chipset that much and want only a couple fast cores, well that exists in the Snapdragon 6xx series chipsets. Just get a mid tier phone, like the Moto G, it will be cheaper and have most of what you want. But don't expect anyone to throw in all kinds of flagship features and then use a mid tier processor.
Good luck to them, I guess. $700 seems way too high for a product from an unknown and unproven company. I think that's too much for a phone from Apple, Google, and Samsung, but at least I know they'll be in business next year if I need support.
Reminds me of the Amazon Fire phone. Not a bad deal at less than $200... after a few months. Though still no microSD card, so it's not for the benighted non-cloud me.
This might be something off an off comment but....
Am I the only one that always puts there phone in case (where possible) that is as thin as possible but it has a flap that covered the screen which wakes it up when you open it?
So far only the Moto G seemed to have a manufacturer made option that was like this, so why don't more phone makers put some effort into this?
It seems that most people you see have either a slim sexy phone in a big fat cases that hides away the designers hard work, or no case on it, so it looks great from a distance, until you get closer and see a section chipped out the side and the screen cracked in at least 1, if not 2 or 3 places.
If only more manufacturers would make a phone case that is actually useful and survivable in the real world that is good looking, slim (as it's designed into the phone casing from the get go) and perhaps even does not hinder the camera when the screen is visible, as the other annoyance is that the screen cover also covered the rear camera when it's opened up.
Maybe it is just me, but I feel a bit better for that mini rant :o)
Motorola started the "always-on display" trend. LG, Samsung, and HTC copied it with later phones, and you could get cases directly from them that had cut-outs for showing info while closed.
I'm intrigued by the device. It's got the specs. Don't care about the lack of integrated headphone jack. Non-removable battery I'm used to and accept with form factor. I would like an SD card expansion slot, but not a deal killer. I'm not bothered by the front facing camera's location. To still include it and eliminate most of the bezel it is almost a requirement. It's 100% stock Android so you could update the OS whenever you want. I went to the website and they claim the titanium won't scratch, dent or bend. So, if it's durable enough to withstand most drops then it really comes down to price.
Wao...this essential phone seems to be really promising but the price regarding the brand seems to be a bit high but we can give it a try here http://goo.gl/EmShnC
Android phones are one of the most used phones around the world. It has great features and it is easy to use. Snapdragon 835 has great features including 802.11ac Wi-Fi, Bluetooth 5.0 LE, dual camera etc. It such an amazing phone, hope to buy soon. Thanks for updating us.
We’ve updated our terms. By continuing to use the site and/or by logging into your account, you agree to the Site’s updated Terms of Use and Privacy Policy.
42 Comments
Back to Article
osxandwindows - Thursday, June 1, 2017 - link
I was hoping for more, not just a pretty phone.Samus - Thursday, June 1, 2017 - link
I can't wrap my head around the design decision of the front facing camera impeding on the screen like that. It looks just awful and utterly destroys the phone for me.When you consider how much bezel there is at the bottom of the screen to intrude into, they should have just done what Sharp did with their bezel-less phone and put the camera at the bottom. Seems like a missed opportunity.
Otherwise, could have been a great phone.
IntelUser2000 - Friday, June 2, 2017 - link
That's a trade-off of having as much screen real-estate as possible and the desire to cram everything into one device.No one else mentioned this, so it seems there will be people ok with it.
Unless someone invents a camera that can be invisibly be part of the LCD screen there's no way you won't ever see these compromises in other min screen bezel phones.
I don't see this as a deal breaker, but I understand some people are really annoyed by small details. For me the deal breaker is the price. I mean, regardless of the features the absolute price is too high.
Sweetbabyjays - Friday, June 2, 2017 - link
I think it looks bad in pictures and may be annoying for the first bit, but most people probably wouldn't notice it after using the phone for a week.BrokenCrayons - Thursday, June 1, 2017 - link
The sealed battery, the missing MicroSD slot, and the lack of a headphone connector, it seems like some very fundamentally basic features were omitted. It's also disturbing that you can purchase $30 phone that's only 2.4mm thicker and get all those things for $669 USD less. Flagship phones like these are a really poor value proposition considering the rate at which they become obsolete, damaged, or lost and they're too large to easily carry.IdBuRnS - Thursday, June 1, 2017 - link
Flagship products are typically not associated with value.bigboxes - Thursday, June 1, 2017 - link
You're not getting those specs in a $30 phone. I realize that many of the techies on here want things to never change. However, all those things that you are missing are due to form factor. So, while they may be practical in a device that is thicker and has larger bezels, they are not in this case. So, using bluetooth and the cloud. My current phone has the sealed battery and does not have microSD. To get it to slim & sexy you need to go to sealed battery. 128GB should be plenty for most usage. My permanent collection is not stored on my phone. Bluetooth audio is preferable on the go. I connect via Bluetooth to my Alpine when I'm in my car. I have a pair of headphones that also connect via Bluetooth. When I'm at home I don't need my phone for audio. Maybe if I was a teenager, but by the time you could afford quality audio you wouldn't be doing it with your phone anyways.MrSpadge - Thursday, June 1, 2017 - link
If you're happy with the SoC, storage, camera etc. in a 30$ phone go ahead and buy & use it. Most people currently using smartphones won't second that choice, though.PixyMisa - Friday, June 2, 2017 - link
I have a Moto G4 Play. Not $30, but cheap enough, and I'm mostly happy with it.The camera however is... Not good.
If that's what you want, go for it. It's not flashy, but it's solidly built, fast enough, and quite reliable. Just don't expect photos to come out looking like anything but cheap smartphone photos.
BrokenCrayons - Friday, June 2, 2017 - link
Yes, agreed you're landing in the domain of ultra-budget hardware at $30. My Alcatel Pixi Unite was $29 and it's camera most certainly takes photos that make its purchase price painfully obvious. I just can't see buying a high end handset like this when there's a whole range of more affordable options that fill the same purpose.Samus - Friday, June 2, 2017 - link
The problem is, a $30 Android phone does 80% of what a $700 Android phone does. That's the hard sell here. If it weren't for subsidies, the Galaxy S8 wouldn't sell nearly as well as it has, where as the iPhone would continue to sell well at retail prices because of the fanbase.That isn't to say Samsung doesn't have a fanbase, but its smaller, and definately more of the subsidy/value crowd. The only decently priced iPhone ever released was obvious the SE, which was obviously free with contract being a $400 phone, but you'd be crazy not to buy a $400 phone outright and just save money on the service.
And that gets us back to budget Android devices. Being unsubsidized, not only are they cheap to own, but cheap to connect to a network, especially an MVNO like Ting.
Cliff34 - Friday, June 2, 2017 - link
Please tell us a 30 dollars phone that runs SD835.artk2219 - Thursday, June 1, 2017 - link
One moderate drop and its done, I really do hate this trend towards fragile devices. It would be nice to have a high end phone that actually comes in a slightly thicker, more resilient package.peevee - Thursday, June 1, 2017 - link
How hard it is actually made rubber corners if you have those top and bottom bezels, right?mooninite - Thursday, June 1, 2017 - link
Weird, too large screen and no headphone jack means no sale! Sorry, Mr. Rubin.MrSpadge - Thursday, June 1, 2017 - link
Don't be fooled by the 5.7" screen - the thin bezels and the higher aspect ratio both make it smaller than earlier phones with such display diagonals.BigLan - Thursday, June 1, 2017 - link
$700 seems like a lot to gamble on a brand new manufacturer with no track record of quality, support or software updates.maximumGPU - Thursday, June 1, 2017 - link
my thoughts as well!bigboxes - Friday, June 2, 2017 - link
Pure Android. Update as you want.bigboxes - Thursday, June 1, 2017 - link
So, is this pure Android?ScottAD - Thursday, June 1, 2017 - link
Yes, it runs on vanilla NougatScottAD - Thursday, June 1, 2017 - link
Complaints seem pretty archaic. Why do people continue wanting physical media when the infrastructure exists for cloud computing. We live in a world that is heading towards a completely un-tethered data structure. Keep permanent storage at home and offline.I'm not a fan of the fragility in the current market but it is also subjective to how the phone lands as much as the materials. Thicker does not equate to strength and until micro-structures in things like Gorilla glass get perfected that is the price you pay to carry a flagship device.
Hurr Durr - Thursday, June 1, 2017 - link
We live in a world that is heading towards complete loss of data ownership. Little wonder sane people object.artk2219 - Thursday, June 1, 2017 - link
Honestly I was thinking more of plastic, which tends to be frowned upon in high end devices. I get the complaint from a thermal point of view, but otherwise if i pay 700 for a device id expect it to not destroy itself from a moderate fall, which is less likely to happen with a slightly thicker glass, and slightly looser plastic case. But then I guess it loses its "premium feel", sigh i guess im just asking for a premium device that may not have the "premium feel", and they could use the extra space for a headphone jack and bigger battery, which would be way more beneficial honestly.cfenton - Thursday, June 1, 2017 - link
For me it's because mobile data is still really expensive. I can't get unlimited data where I live, and even if I could, it would be more per month than what I would pay for a 64GB SD card. I'd be fine using the cloud for everything, but not when I have to constantly worry how much it's going to cost me.vladx - Thursday, June 1, 2017 - link
The green version looks awesome, too bad without dualsim it's a no go for an European guy like me.jjj - Thursday, June 1, 2017 - link
No audio jack and no microSD, this guy has never used Android.It's hard to start with a bigger disaster than that. It shows ignorance, lack of product design talent and no trace of decency.
Beyond that ,the excessive cutout and the chin just don't work together. By next yea,nobody will remember this device and they fully deserve that.
phoenix_rizzen - Thursday, June 1, 2017 - link
The excuse given for the large bottom bezel is that's where the display controller is. Why hasn't anyone installed the screen "upside down", with the controller at the top? That way, there's room for the front camera, sensors, and speakers at the top. There's nothing needed at the bottom but a microphone, headphone jack, and charging port, which can all go behind the screen and out the bottom.Cliff34 - Friday, June 2, 2017 - link
Controllers are at the bottom because it is the easiest place for you to access them with your thumb.phoenix_rizzen - Friday, June 2, 2017 - link
Uh, you don't access the display controller with any part of your anatomy, it's not a user-facing part. It's what connects the display to the motherboard and controls what/how the display works.sonny73n - Friday, June 2, 2017 - link
He created an Android phone while still obsessed with the iPhone. Hence no SD card slot and headphone jack. Between this expensive ugly crap and the $70 iPhone 4, I'll take the latter.gg555 - Friday, June 9, 2017 - link
"No audio jack and no microSD, this guy has never used Android. It's hard to start with a bigger disaster than that. It shows ignorance..."Uh, you understand that Andy Rubin is the ceator/inventor of Android, right? He invented Android, then it was bought by Google, then he was the head of development of Android for Google for eight years until it became the global dominant phone OS. Oh yeah, and "Android" was Rubin's nickname, because he loved robots, when he was younger. So the Android operating system is in fact named after Rubin. So I suspect he has used Android, just a little.
Whatever you think of the phone design, saying that the person who made this phone does not understand Android is the only ignorance going on here.
peevee - Thursday, June 1, 2017 - link
No firm promise of timely Android updates for 3+ years = no buy.And why the hell the non-replaceable battery again?
Somebody, please make an honest phone with US frequencies including Band 12 (and Qualcomm modem, I don't care if CPUs are Qualcomm or not).
0. Pure Android with immediate updates, including availability of betas, right after they are submitted to AOSP!!!
1. Fast CPU
2. Big, replaceable battery
3. No useless waste of battery for screen with too high resolution and power-hungry GPU to feed it, 1280x800 would do.
4. No bezels.
5. At least 1/2.3" rear sensor, OSPDAF, 4k, f/2 or faster. Sony's 23mpix would be good for digital zoom/cropping (if lens is fast and sharp in the middle), no 2nd camera needed.
6. Fast flash and DRAM.
7. IP68.
8. Honest price, if Qualcomm wants too much for S835, use Huawei or Samsung or whatever with at least a couple of fast cores. NO, 64GB of extra flash DOES NOT cost $100, look at SSDs, full 64GB SSD is $37 retail already, 128GB is $52 so it is $15 extra, retail.
MicroSD/2nd SIM slot would be good but not essential.
gg555 - Friday, June 9, 2017 - link
What flagship smartphone in the last several years has had a user replaceable battery? How can people still be complaining about this when it's been long gone for years now.Anyway, your phone design suggestions would result in a phone that would be the size of a small tablet a weigh twice as much as most phones. If people want large screens (regardless of resolution) in a reasonable sized device, then something has to be scarificed.
People want all these things and don't understand that there are just basic design limitations and then complain when magic can't happen.
Also, your phone wouln't be any cheaper. The markup on flagship Android phones is only about 10% (30% on the iPhone). This phone is priced right in line with other flagship phones.
No one is going to sell you a device at no profit.
And if you really don't care about the chipset that much and want only a couple fast cores, well that exists in the Snapdragon 6xx series chipsets. Just get a mid tier phone, like the Moto G, it will be cheaper and have most of what you want. But don't expect anyone to throw in all kinds of flagship features and then use a mid tier processor.
cfenton - Thursday, June 1, 2017 - link
Good luck to them, I guess. $700 seems way too high for a product from an unknown and unproven company. I think that's too much for a phone from Apple, Google, and Samsung, but at least I know they'll be in business next year if I need support.RaistlinZ - Thursday, June 1, 2017 - link
Ditto. At $499 this thing might have a future, as long as they guarantee Android updates through the end of 2019. But at $699 I think not.Arbie - Thursday, June 1, 2017 - link
Reminds me of the Amazon Fire phone. Not a bad deal at less than $200... after a few months. Though still no microSD card, so it's not for the benighted non-cloud me.Aloonatic - Friday, June 2, 2017 - link
This might be something off an off comment but....Am I the only one that always puts there phone in case (where possible) that is as thin as possible but it has a flap that covered the screen which wakes it up when you open it?
So far only the Moto G seemed to have a manufacturer made option that was like this, so why don't more phone makers put some effort into this?
It seems that most people you see have either a slim sexy phone in a big fat cases that hides away the designers hard work, or no case on it, so it looks great from a distance, until you get closer and see a section chipped out the side and the screen cracked in at least 1, if not 2 or 3 places.
If only more manufacturers would make a phone case that is actually useful and survivable in the real world that is good looking, slim (as it's designed into the phone casing from the get go) and perhaps even does not hinder the camera when the screen is visible, as the other annoyance is that the screen cover also covered the rear camera when it's opened up.
Maybe it is just me, but I feel a bit better for that mini rant :o)
phoenix_rizzen - Friday, June 2, 2017 - link
Motorola started the "always-on display" trend. LG, Samsung, and HTC copied it with later phones, and you could get cases directly from them that had cut-outs for showing info while closed.bigboxes - Friday, June 2, 2017 - link
I'm intrigued by the device. It's got the specs. Don't care about the lack of integrated headphone jack. Non-removable battery I'm used to and accept with form factor. I would like an SD card expansion slot, but not a deal killer. I'm not bothered by the front facing camera's location. To still include it and eliminate most of the bezel it is almost a requirement. It's 100% stock Android so you could update the OS whenever you want. I went to the website and they claim the titanium won't scratch, dent or bend. So, if it's durable enough to withstand most drops then it really comes down to price.Sajid Bashir - Monday, June 5, 2017 - link
Wao...this essential phone seems to be really promising but the price regarding the brand seems to be a bit high but we can give it a try here http://goo.gl/EmShnCravigupta - Thursday, July 6, 2017 - link
Android phones are one of the most used phones around the world. It has great features and it is easy to use. Snapdragon 835 has great features including 802.11ac Wi-Fi, Bluetooth 5.0 LE, dual camera etc.It such an amazing phone, hope to buy soon.
Thanks for updating us.